Fort Wint
WW2-era fort in the Philippines
Fort Wint was part of the harbor defenses of Manila and Subic Bays built by the Philippine Department of the United States Army between 1907 and 1920 in response to recommendations of the Taft Board prior to the non-fortification clause of the Washington Naval Treaty. Fort Wint was located on Grande Island at the entrance of Subic Bay, approximately 35 miles (56 km) north of Manila Bay. The fort was named for Brigadier General Theodore J. Wint. As specified in the National Defense Act of 1935, this was one of the locations where coastal artillery training was conducted. A battery of the 60th Coast Artillery (AA) was stationed here.
Armament
Fort Wint was armed with fourteen Taft-Endicott period coast artillery pieces mounted in five batteries. Battery Warwick contained the fort's most powerful weaponry, two 10-inch (254 mm) M1895 disappearing guns on Buffington-Crozier carriages. Batteries Hall and Woodruff each mounted two 6-inch (152 mm) M1905 guns, also on disappearing carriages. Batteries Flake and Jewell were armed with 3-inch (76 mm) M1903 guns on pedestal mounts.
As with other forts of the same period, the weaponry of Fort Wint was obsolete at the outbreak of hostilities with Japan in 1941.
The public source identifies “Fort Wint” as wW2-era fort in the Philippines. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Fort, Wint and WW2-era.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Fort Wint”, the useful work is to connect “wW2-era fort in the Philippines” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
The strongest evidence will usually combine a dated visual record with documents produced by the authority responsible for the place. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 19, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q5472361. The first chronological checks are 1907, 1920, 1935 and 1941.
A single description cannot reconcile every naming convention, rebuilding phase or administrative transfer associated with a place. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Treat names, boundaries and functions as historically changeable. Maps, plans, inventories and administrative records can clarify what the place meant at different dates.
- Historic place names
- Jurisdictional context
- Routes into maps and plans
Contemporary maps, plans, listed-building records, estate papers and the responsible local or national archive.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Fort Wint”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Fort Wint primary sources, Fort Wint archive and Fort research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Fort Wint”?
- What physical evidence or contemporary plan supports the description?
- Which earlier names or jurisdictions may reveal additional records?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Fort Wint” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.